Age of Wollensak 6¼" (159mm) Extreme W.A.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

OK, here's a couple pictures of my two Wollensak 6¼" (159mm) f12.5 Ext. WA lenses.

Here's the new one (link to the eBay auction in my original post). It just arrived yesterday. It's in a non-synch Rapax shutter, and is in extremely fine condition. It was old stock from a camera store, and apparently, I am the original owner. It shows minor signs of being handled over the years, but was never sold until I bought it off eBay. The shutter needs a CLA. Once that's done. I'll give it a try.



Here's' a photo of it next to my "older" sample. Although the shutter on the one on the right shows more signs of use, the glass is perfect. For those concerned about prices, I got that one late last Fall on eBay, I'd have to look up the exact price, but I know it was well below $300, perhaps even less than $250. The shutter just got back from a CLA, and I plan to shoot with this one in the next couple of weeks. It's in a Rapax Synchromatic shutter.



It's a bit hard to tell due to a hot spot in the photo, but the serial number is 703227. The one on the left should be readable and is 736166.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

I'd have to look up the exact price, but I know it was well below $300, perhaps even less than $250.

OK, I just looked it up. I paid $151.50 for the lens on the right. So, there are still bargains to be had if you're patient. The shutter would occasionally drag on the slow speeds. I just sent it out for a CLA ($45.00), and now it purrs like new.

Kerry

[Mark Sawyer]

Kerry- I'm looking forward to seeing the results of your tests! In retrospect, $400 isn't bad for a really nice 8x10 lens, especially if it can let you make images that match your vision. (I'm very fond of my old uncoated one.) I think some of us, myself included, get too caught up in prices just because ebay is such a fun place to look for lenses which run from the modern and mainstream to the antique, rare, and outright bizarre.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Mark,

$400 is definitely on the high end for these lenses. But still, for a coated lens in a functional shutter that covers 8x10, it's not outrageous. Typical samples (used, but still very usable) usually sell for between $250 and $300. The $151.50 I paid for my first one was lower than average and $394.99 is definitely higher than average. So, we have examples at both extremes.

It's funny, I bought that one for $151.50 after losing out on one that Tim bought for about $100 more. Sometimes you just get lucky.

I plan to shoot 4x10 color transparencies, and was looking for the "best" compact wide angle in the 150mm range. I know the Wolly will cover with room to spare. Coverage guesstimates on the 150mm Kyvytar/Compurat/Graphic-Kowa are all over the map, but 290mm seems to be the most common claim. When I get around to it, I plan to shoot all three, as well as a 150mm G Claron, 150mm Germinar-W and 150mm APO-Sironar-S on 8x10 to see just how much they cover. Other than the Wolly, I doubt if any of these will hit the corners of 8x10, but they should all either cover 4x10, or come pretty close. The results of the tests will also be of interest to 5x7 shooters as all these lenses will cover 5x7 with varying degrees of movements.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

It's funny, I bought that one for $151.50 after losing out on one that Tim bought for about $100 more. Sometimes you just get lucky.

Minor correction - I actually out bid Tim on that oher lens with the higher price, but did not meet the seller's reserve. Then a couple weeks later, I won this one at $151.50.

Kerry

[tim atherton]

And just after Kerry outbid me I found a pristine one for $131.50...

(knew I kept all those old emails for a purpose!)

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Tim,

Now that we have our Wollies, we should stop mentioning the low prices we paid or we might drive the prices down and ruin our wise investments (aka: lucky deals). Afterall, I have two of these guys and will likely sell one at some time in the future. I'd sure rather get $394.99 for it than $131.50.

Kerry

[Mark Sawyer]

Okay, we're talking way too much about prices, but I just noticed Kerry's lens had no yellow dot and did some checking... Kerry, you bought yours new-in-the-box for $332.75 on March 3. The used-with-no-box-but-a-cute-little-yellow-dot went for $394.99 0n March 8.

Guess I can understand the price difference, though. I can't make great art without dots on my lens...

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Mark,

The curious yellow dot, as well as the completely different serial number styles, is what prompted my initial post. As both lenses appear to be roughly the same age (1955 plus/minus 10 years), I was baffled by the differences, and if there is any signifcance to them. While there's been quite a bit of sharing of serial number data in this thread, I still don't know (for sure) which lens is newer or older and why one bears a yellow dot and the other doesn't.

For the sake of future readers, I got permission from the seller of the yellow dot lens to post his photo of that lens in this thread.



There, now we have photos of samples with both serial numbering sequences.

Kerry

[Mark Sawyer]

Sorry, all; I got so involved in the later part of this thread that I forgot the details of the early part. Perhaps someone may still come forward with a solution to the mystery of the dots.